BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 00:53

Ive been in both too....plenty o times. And I'm here to tell ya, they don't feel the same. I don't care what the volume numbers say, ride 'em and tell me which one has a larger cabin. Although, I've not been in the new CJ's like the 3 and 4 and such. I'm talking the citation I and CJ 1.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 01:02

Username Protected wrote:

Eclipse is closer to my 58P. Fits in the same hanger. Not cabin class. Much more efficient for a couple folks. If the numbers are cooked, I'd really appreciate knowing how. FL410 isn't going to happen a lot, but one doesn't have to plan using those numbers.Dave

When I was flying the Eclipse, one flight stands out. FL340, 340 KTAS, six people on board (710 pounds), from Cabo San Lucas to Nogales. A beautiful flight, smooth as glass, picking my way around scattered TRW, Radar showing a gorgeous picture. A perfect day. FL350 is the sweet spot, higher is only good for weather.

But I had more trouble with those two airplanes in 120 hours than with my own Bonanza in 2,000, or the 747 in 23,000! A real love/hate relationship!

Best...
John Deakin

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 01:33

Username Protected wrote:

Ive been in both too....plenty o times. And I'm here to tell ya, they don't feel the same. I don't care what the volume numbers say, ride 'em and tell me which one has a larger cabin. J 1.

Perhaps I misunderstood your previous post where you seem to say that you have never been in a Mustang.

I was making the point that these two airplanes have similar cabin dimensions, whether or not you care about the numbers is up to you. I clearly stipulated that despite their comparable width and height the King Air DOES seem to be more spacious.

Individual preferences and perspectives vary greatly but the fact is the cabin space of these planes are similar.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 01:52

Username Protected wrote:

Ive been in both too....plenty o times. And I'm here to tell ya, they don't feel the same. I don't care what the volume numbers say, ride 'em and tell me which one has a larger cabin. J 1.

Perhaps I misunderstood your previous post where you seem to say that you have never been in a Mustang.

I was making the point that these two airplanes have similar cabin dimensions, whether or not you care about the numbers is up to you. I clearly stipulated that despite their comparable width and height the King Air DOES seem to be more spacious.

Individual preferences and perspectives vary greatly but the fact is the cabin space of these planes are similar.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 01:56

Username Protected wrote:

Nope, you didn't misunderstand. I've not been in a mustang. My comparison to a KA was the original sized CJ's and citation I's (which I've flown in, back and front). Pretty sure the CJ/citation I is larger than the mustang. I've not looked up the actual volumes as they are precisely calculated...I only offer my opinion with regard to what it feels like inside. I'm surprised to hear that the mustang is the same as the KA90...that means a CJ1 must be larger inside than a 90. Learn something new everyday here on BT.

Y'know, I haven't got measurements, but I'd hate to bet on a CJ1 being roomier inside than a King Air. My recollection is quite the opposite.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 08:27

Username Protected wrote:

To me, you're comparing apples and oranges. A CJ weighs how many pounds? What's the fuel burn? Cabin class that has to go high and far with a lot of folks to make any sense.

Mustang is more the size of a,King Air. Cabin class with a potty. I flew one: very nice, but range with reserves wasn't much better than my Baron.

Eclipse is closer to my 58P. Fits in the same hanger. Not cabin class. Much more efficient for a couple folks. If the numbers are cooked, I'd really appreciate knowing how. FL410 isn't going to happen a lot, but one doesn't have to plan using those numbers.

Dave

I compare airplanes based on $$ first. If I can have a larger, better airplane for the same money then it's a legitimate comparison.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 08:28

Username Protected wrote:

Eclipse is closer to my 58P. Fits in the same hanger. Not cabin class. Much more efficient for a couple folks. If the numbers are cooked, I'd really appreciate knowing how. FL410 isn't going to happen a lot, but one doesn't have to plan using those numbers.Dave

When I was flying the Eclipse, one flight stands out. FL340, 340 KTAS, six people on board (710 pounds), from Cabo San Lucas to Nogales. A beautiful flight, smooth as glass, picking my way around scattered TRW, Radar showing a gorgeous picture. A perfect day. FL350 is the sweet spot, higher is only good for weather.

But I had more trouble with those two airplanes in 120 hours than with my own Bonanza in 2,000, or the 747 in 23,000! A real love/hate relationship!

Best...
John Deakin

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 08:31

Username Protected wrote:

6 people=710 lbs?

Attachment:

DionneQuintuplets.jpg

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 08:33

A CJ is not roomier or larger or anything size wise compared to a KA.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 11:21

Username Protected wrote:

A CJ is not roomier or larger or anything size wise compared to a KA.

Did someone compare the CJ to the KA, or a Mustang to a KA??? :scratch:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 11:29

Username Protected wrote:

6 people=710 lbs?

Attachment:

DionneQuintuplets.jpg

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 11:57

No sense in dwelling on this. Last time I looked at a CJ it was more than three times the weight of Eclipse. Engines are much less efficient.

King Air and Mustang are close in size, of course, different engines. Mustang was almost 3.5 million last I looked.

Best,

Dave

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 12:30

Username Protected wrote:

No sense in dwelling on this. Last time I looked at a CJ it was more than three times the weight of Eclipse. Engines are much less efficient.

King Air and Mustang are close in size, of course, different engines. Mustang was almost 3.5 million last I looked.

Best,

Dave

They're all asking in the $2.5 million range. 2009-2010 MY
http://www.controller.com/listingsdetai ... 169923.htm?

Mustang burns 100GPH block. What's an Eclipse burn? Can't be much less if at all.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 13:04

I must have been asleep when I posted the earlier message.

FL 340, TAS 340, 70 GPH, 710 pounds of people and bags.

Best...
John Deakin

Username Protected wrote:

No sense in dwelling on this. Last time I looked at a CJ it was more than three times the weight of Eclipse. Engines are much less efficient.

King Air and Mustang are close in size, of course, different engines. Mustang was almost 3.5 million last I looked.

Best,

Dave

They're all asking in the $2.5 million range. 2009-2010 MY
http://www.controller.com/listingsdetai ... 169923.htm?

Mustang burns 100GPH block. What's an Eclipse burn? Can't be much less if at all.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 18 Feb 2011, 13:17

Username Protected wrote:

Eclipse is closer to my 58P. Fits in the same hanger. Not cabin class. Much more efficient for a couple folks. If the numbers are cooked, I'd really appreciate knowing how. FL410 isn't going to happen a lot, but one doesn't have to plan using those numbers.Dave

When I was flying the Eclipse, one flight stands out. FL340, 340 KTAS, six people on board (710 pounds), from Cabo San Lucas to Nogales. A beautiful flight, smooth as glass, picking my way around scattered TRW, Radar showing a gorgeous picture. A perfect day. FL350 is the sweet spot, higher is only good for weather.

But I had more trouble with those two airplanes in 120 hours than with my own Bonanza in 2,000, or the 747 in 23,000! A real love/hate relationship!

Best...
John Deakin

Eclipse demo flight tomorrow.